Basil Attipetty @ Basil A.G vs Union Of India on 25 August, 2010
This is the 2nd round litigation in this Court challenging
the establishment and constitution of Kerala Administrative
Tribunal. The first round of litigation ended up with the
Division Bench judgment in Sreekandan v. State of Kerala,
reported in 2011(2) KLT 394, wherein this Court upheld the
establishment of the Tribunal and appointment of the
Chairman, against which SLP filed is said to be pending before
the Honourable Supreme Court. In these batch cases, in
addition to the challenge against the establishment and
constitution of the Tribunal and appointment of the Chairman,
some of the petitioners have challenged the selection and
appointment of two Administrative Members from out of the 3
candidates selected by the selection committee. So far as
WP(C) Nos.34472 of 2011 & connected cases
-2-
Judicial Members are concerned, even though the selection
committee selected two candidates, both members of the High
Court Bar, from among several candidates who applied for the
post including judicial officers from the State Subordinate
Judiciary, the State Government dropped their names with the
concurrence of the Governor which is accepted by the Central
Government. WP(C) No.22382/2011 is filed by a State
Government Employees Organisation challenging the
Government Orders dropping the two candidates selected for
appointment as Judicial Members and besides praying for
quashing those orders, the petitioner seeks direction from this
Court to both the State and Central Governments to forward
their names to the Chief Justice of India for considering
approval for appointment. However, most of the petitioners in
the other WP(C)s challenge the procedure for selection
adopted by the selection committee for selection of all the
members as arbitrary and violative of the provisions of the Act
and the Rules. The factual position as of now is that the
Chairman was appointed on 25/08/2010 and on account of
WP(C) Nos.34472 of 2011 & connected cases
-3-
delay in appointment of members, the Tribunal could not start
functioning for 1= years, since it's establishment. From
among the three Administrative Members selected by the
selection committee constituted under Rule 3(2) of the
Administrative Tribunals (Procedure for appointment of Vice
Chairman and Members) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to
as the Rules for short), the President of India in consultation
with the Chief Justice of India appointed two Administrative
Members (both retired from Indian Administrative Service).
The Administrative Members took charge on 22/12/2011 &
02/01/2012 respectively, and thereafter the Tribunal started
sitting at the Principal Bench at Thiruvananthapuram. The
Tribunal as of now is constituted with a retired High Court
Judge as it's Chairman and two retired IAS Officers as
Administrative Members. No Judicial Member is so far
appointed. Learned Advocate General submitted that the State
Government prefers appointment of District Judges as Judicial
Members for which no amendment is so far made to the Rules.
Consequent upon the commencement of sitting of the
WP(C) Nos.34472 of 2011 & connected cases
-4-
Tribunal, the Registrar General of the High Court issued
orders on 21/12/2011 produced as Ext.P15 in WP(C)
No.34472/2011 stating that from 22/12/2011 onwards, the
High Court registry will not entertain any service case
pertaining to employees of State Government, State
Government Schools and Government Colleges. So far as
service cases pending before the Single Judges of the High
Court over which the Tribunal has jurisdiction are concerned,
those are being transferred to the Tribunal in terms of Section
29 of the Act on orders by the Single Judges. Besides
challenging the selection and appointment of members so far
made, the petitioners have a case that the Tribunal without
Judicial Members is not properly constituted and therefore
should not be allowed to function. Consequently, challenge is
made against Ext.P15 order of the Registrar General of the
High Court prohibiting filing of service cases in the High Court
over which the Tribunal has jurisdiction. Prayers in these Writ
Petitions are for declaring the establishment of the Tribunal
and appointment of the Chairman and Members as invalid and
WP(C) Nos.34472 of 2011 & connected cases
-5-
also for quashing Ext.P15 order of the Registrar General
prohibiting filing of service cases in the High Court and a
direction is also sought against the transfer of cases pending
in the High Court to the Tribunal. So far as WP(C)
No.22382/2011 is concerned, the same is filed by the Kerala
Non-Gazetted Officers' Union challenging the State
Government's decision to drop the two Judicial Members
selected by the selection committee and the prayer is for
quashing Government Orders and for direction to the State
and Central Governments to proceed with their appointment if
the Chief Justice of India approves the names. As all the
issues raised are common or identical, we have clubbed the
cases, heard learned counsel for both sides in all the cases
and also the learned Advocate General and proceed to dispose
of the cases by this common judgment.